Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> so we should tally up the money spent on cancer 
> research for all those countries combined.

And don't forget the private investments, and the amount of money that 
will be spent on cancer cures even after they're invented, as in paying 
for the drugs etc.

>     I do find this whole discussion amusing given that Congress is 
> considering a $700 Billion bailout for Wall Street. LHC is tiny on that 
> scale.

It's not $700 billion. It's $700 billion at one time. Once you sell off 
for $10 billion the stuff you bought for $700 billion, you can buy 
another $700 billion.

> Moreover, using your type of argument, given how much 
> money has been pumped into it without apparently coming *close* to a 
> cure, I could make the case that brain cancer research is wasteful and 
> funding for it should be reduced.

Plus, there actually is an upper limit on how much you can spend on that 
research, and it isn't obvious to me that we've not come close to that 
limit. Once all competent researchers are sufficiently funded and all 
patients are already engaged in studies, pouring more money into it is 
just wasteful. Not that I think we're there, but I'd like to see 
something about what percentage of people doing cancer research don't 
have enough funding to continue.

And why not talk about funding AIDS research? Merely because *you* don't 
have AIDS?

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)

Post a reply to this message